SEC Petition Evaluation Report 

Petition SEC-00100 

Report Rev #:_0___ Report Submittal Date: __February 19, 2008____ 

Subject Expert(s): Monica Harrison-Maples 

Site Expert(s): N/A 

Petitioner Administrative Summary 

Petition Under Evaluation 

Petition # Petition 

Type 

Petition A 

Receipt Date DOE/AWE Facility Name 

SEC-00100 83.14 October 22, 2007 Kellex/Pierpont 

Proposed Class Definition 

All AWE employees who worked at the Kellex/Pierpont facility in Jersey City, New Jersey from 

January 1, 1943 through December 31, 1953, for a number of work days aggregating at least 250 work 

days, occurring either solely under this employment or in combination with work days within the 

parameters established for one or more other classes of employees in the SEC. 

Related Petition Summary Information 

SEC Petition Tracking #(s) Petition Type DOE/AWE Facility Name Petition Status 

N/A N/A N/A N/A 

Related Evaluation Report Information 

Report Title DOE/AWE Facility Name 

N/A N/A 

ORAU Lead Technical Evaluator: Monica ORAU Review Completed By: Michael Kubiak 

Harrison-Maples 

Peer Review Completed By: [Signature on file] 

 Chris Crawford 

02/22/2008 

Date 

SEC Petition Evaluation Reviewed By: [Signature on file] 

J. W. Neton 

02/25/2008 

Date 

SEC Evaluation Approved By: [Signature on file] 

Larry Elliott 

02/27/2008 

Date 
SEC-00100 02-19-08 Kellex/Pierpont 

This page intentionally left blank 

2 of 21
 
SEC-00100 02-19-08 Kellex/Pierpont 

Evaluation Report Summary: SEC-00100, Kellex/Pierpont 

This evaluation report by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) 

addresses a class of employees proposed for addition to the Special Exposure Cohort (SEC) per the 

Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act of 2000, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 

§ 7384 et seq. (EEOICPA) and 42 C.F.R. pt. 83, Procedures for Designating Classes of Employees 

as Members of the Special Exposure Cohort Under the Energy Employees Occupational Illness 

Compensation Program Act of 2000. 

NIOSH-Proposed Class Definition 

The NIOSH-proposed class includes all Atomic Weapons Employer (AWE) employees who worked 

at the Kellex/Pierpont facility in Jersey City, New Jersey from January 1, 1943 through December 31, 

1953, for a number of work days aggregating at least 250 work days, occurring either solely under this 

employment or in combination with work days within the parameters established for one or more 

other classes of employees in the SEC. 

Feasibility of Dose Reconstruction 

Per EEOICPA and 42 C.F.R. § 83.14(b), NIOSH has established that it does not have sufficient 

information to complete dose reconstructions for individual members of the class with sufficient 

accuracy. NIOSH lacks personal internal exposure monitoring, area monitoring, and source term data, 

making reconstruction of total internal radiation doses infeasible. 

Health Endangerment Determination 

The NIOSH evaluation did not identify evidence supplied by the petitioners or from other sources that 

would establish the class was exposed to radiation during a discrete incident likely to have involved 

exceptionally high-level exposures, such as nuclear criticality incidents or other events involving 

similarly high levels of exposures. However, the evidence reviewed in this evaluation indicates that 

some workers in the class may have received radiation exposures through intakes of various 

radionuclides and from direct exposure to radioactive materials. Therefore, 42 C.F.R. § 

83.13(c)(3)(ii) requires NIOSH to specify that health may have been endangered for those workers 

covered by this evaluation who were employed for a number of work days aggregating at least 250 

work days within the parameters established for this class or in combination with work days within 

the parameters established for one or more other classes of employees in the SEC. 

3 of 21 
SEC-00100 02-19-08 Kellex/Pierpont 

This page intentionally left blank 

4 of 21
 
SEC-00100 02-19-08 Kellex/Pierpont 

Table of Contents 

Evaluation Report Summary: SEC-00100, Kellex/Pierpont ................................................................... 3
 

1.0 Purpose and Scope....................................................................................................................... 7
 

2.0 Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 7
 

3.0 NIOSH-Proposed Class Definition and Petition Basis................................................................ 8
 

4.0 Radiological Operations Relevant to the Proposed Class ........................................................... 8 

4.1 Operations Description ....................................................................................................... 9 

4.2 Radiation Exposure Potential from Operations ................................................................ 10 

4.3 Time Period Associated with Radiological Operations.................................................... 10 

4.4 Site Locations Associated with Radiological Operations ................................................ 10 

4.5 Job Descriptions Affected by Radiological Operations ................................................... 11
 

5.0 Summary of Available Monitoring Data for the Proposed Class .............................................. 11 

5.1 Internal Personnel Monitoring Data ................................................................................. 11 

5.2 External Personnel Monitoring Data ................................................................................ 12 

5.3 Workplace Monitoring Data............................................................................................. 12 

5.4 Radiological Source Term Data ....................................................................................... 13
 

6.0 Feasibility of Dose Reconstruction for the Proposed Class ...................................................... 13 

6.1 Feasibility of Estimating Internal Exposures ................................................................... 14 

6.2 Feasibility of Estimating External Exposures .................................................................. 15
 

7.0 Summary of Feasibility Findings for Petition SEC-00100........................................................ 15
 

8.0 Evaluation of Health Endangerment for Petition SEC-00100................................................... 16
 

9.0 NIOSH-Proposed Class for Petition SEC-00100 ...................................................................... 16
 

10.0 Evaluation of Second Similar Class .......................................................................................... 17
 

11.0 References ................................................................................................................................. 19 

5 of 21 
SEC-00100 02-19-08 Kellex/Pierpont 

This page intentionally left blank 

6 of 21
 
 

SEC-00100 02-19-08 Kellex/Pierpont 

SEC Petition Evaluation Report for SEC-00100 

1.0 Purpose and Scope 

ATTRIBUTION AND ANNOTATION: This is a single-author document. All conclusions drawn from 

the data presented in this evaluation were made by the Oak Ridge Associated Universities (ORAU) 

Team Lead Technical Evaluator: Monica Harrison-Maples, ORAU. These conclusions were peerreviewed by the individuals listed on the cover page. The rationales for all conclusions in this 

document are explained in the associated text. 

This report evaluates the feasibility of reconstructing doses for employees who worked at 

Kellex/Pierpont, located in Jersey City, New Jersey, during a specified time. It provides information 

and analysis germane to considering a petition for adding a class of employees to the Congressionallycreated SEC. 

This report does not make any determinations concerning the feasibility of dose reconstruction that 

necessarily apply to any individual energy employee who might require a dose reconstruction from 

NIOSH, with the exception of the employee whose dose reconstruction could not be completed, and 

whose claim consequently led to this petition evaluation. The finding in this report is not the final 

determination as to whether or not the proposed class will be added to the SEC. This report will be 

considered by the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health (the Board) and by the Secretary 

of Health and Human Services (HHS). The Secretary of HHS will make final decisions concerning 

whether or not to add one or more classes to the SEC in response to the petition addressed by this 

report. 

This evaluation, in which NIOSH provides its findings both on the feasibility of estimating radiation 

doses of members of this class with sufficient accuracy and on health endangerment, was conducted in 

accordance with the requirements of EEOICPA and 42 C.F.R. § 83.14. 

2.0 Introduction 

Both EEOICPA and 42 C.F.R. pt. 83 require NIOSH to evaluate qualified petitions requesting the 

Department of Health and Human Services to add a class of employees to the SEC. The evaluation is 

intended to provide a fair, science-based determination of whether it is feasible to estimate, with 

sufficient accuracy, the radiation doses of the proposed class of employees through NIOSH dose 

reconstructions.1 

NIOSH is required to document its evaluation in a report, and to do so, relies upon both its own dose 

reconstruction expertise as well as technical support from its contractor, Oak Ridge Associated 

Universities (ORAU). Once completed, NIOSH provides the report to both the petitioners and the 

Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health. The Board will consider the NIOSH evaluation 

report, together with the petition, comments of the petitioner(s) and such other information as the 

1

 NIOSH dose reconstructions under EEOICPA are performed using the methods promulgated under 42 C.F.R. pt. 82 and 

the detailed implementation guidelines available at http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/ocas. 

7 of 21 
 

 

SEC-00100 02-19-08 Kellex/Pierpont 

Board considers appropriate, to make recommendations to the Secretary of HHS on whether or not to 

add one or more classes of employees to the SEC. Once NIOSH has received and considered the 

advice of the Board, the Director of NIOSH will propose a decision on behalf of HHS. The Secretary 

of HHS will make the final decision, taking into account the NIOSH evaluation, the advice of the 

Board, and the proposed decision issued by NIOSH. As part of this final decision process, the 

petitioner(s) may seek a review of certain types of final decisions issued by the Secretary of HHS.2 

3.0 NIOSH-Proposed Class Definition and Petition Basis 

The NIOSH-proposed class includes all AWE employees who worked at the Kellex/Pierpont facility 

in Jersey City, New Jersey from January 1, 1943 through December 31, 1953, for a number of work 

days aggregating at least 250 work days, occurring either solely under this employment or in 

combination with work days within the parameters established for one or more other classes of 

employees in the SEC. During this period, employees at this facility were involved in the design and 

construction of the first gaseous diffusion uranium enrichment facility, basic research and 

development related to fuel reprocessing, component testing, and the development of barrier 

technology for gaseous diffusion. Through such work, employees may have been exposed to various 

forms of uranium, various transuranics radionuclides, and fission and activation products associated 

with fuel reprocessing research. 

The evaluation responds to the Petition designated SEC-00100, which was submitted by an EEOICPA 

claimant whose dose reconstruction could not be completed by NIOSH due to a lack of sufficient 

dosimetry-related information. This claimant was employed at Kellex/Pierpont from September 1943 

through January 1946. NIOSH’s determination that it is unable to complete a dose reconstruction for 

an EEOICPA claimant is a qualified basis for submitting an SEC petition pursuant to 42 C.F.R. § 

83.9(b). 

4.0 Radiological Operations Relevant to the Proposed Class 

The following subsections summarize the radiological operations at Kellex/Pierpont from January 1, 

1943 to December 31, 1953 and the information available to NIOSH to characterize particular 

processes and radioactive source materials. Using available sources, NIOSH has attempted to gather 

process and source descriptions, information regarding the identity and quantities of radionuclides of 

concern, and information describing processes through which the radiation exposures of concern may 

have occurred and the physical environment in which they may have occurred. The information 

included within this evaluation report is meant only to be a summary of the available information. 

Data capture efforts for Kellex/Pierpont have included a visit to the DOE Germantown Office and 

multiple visits to the National Archive and Records Administration (NARA) facilities in Atlanta, 

Georgia and Kansas City, Missouri. NIOSH has also queried the Fernald Legal Database, the 

OpenNet database, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Agency-wide Documents Access and 

Management System (ADAMS) database, and the Office of Scientific & Technical Information 

2 See 42 C.F.R. pt. 83 for a full description of the procedures summarized here. Additional internal procedures are 

available at http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/ocas. 

8 of 21 
SEC-00100 02-19-08 Kellex/Pierpont 

(OSTI) database in an effort to locate relevant records. Additionally, inquiries were made to the state 

of New Jersey. Kellex, the company that operated Kellex/Pierpont, no longer exists and could not be 

contacted to request any records. All records relevant to the Kellex/Pierpont petition have been 

uploaded into the NIOSH Site Research Database (SRDB). 

4.1 Operations Description 

In 1943, the M.W. Kellogg Company established the Kellex Corporation to design and construct the 

first gaseous diffusion uranium enrichment facility, the K-25 Plant, in Oak Ridge, Tennessee. This 

work was conducted under contract to the Manhattan Engineer District (MED) and later to the Atomic 

Energy Commission (AEC). The project contract initially called for designing, engineering, and 

assisting with the construction of the K-25 Plant. The Kellex/Pierpont facility was originally operated 

by the Kellex Corporation (later known as Vitro Corporation) for the AEC. 

In support of the K-25 effort, pilot plant activities were carried out at the Kellex/Pierpont facility on 

Danforth Avenue in Jersey City. The Kellex/Pierpont facility consisted of 43 acres, with 

approximately 20 buildings across the property. In 1947, the contract with Kellex was modified to 

include research and development of a solvent extraction process to recover uranium from reactor 

wastes stored at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation in Richland, Washington. These solvent extraction 

operations spanned from June 1, 1947 through July 7, 1948. 

On January 31, 1950, the AEC also contracted with Kellex for research and development of new 

solvent processing techniques for the purification of uranium and the recovery of any other valuable 

components (i.e., radium) from low-grade wastes. The basic refinery process work ended in July 

1951. Contract documentation located by NIOSH indicates radiological work at Kellex/Pierpont 

ended in 1952 (Kellex, date unknown; ORNL, date unknown), but radiological monitoring continued 

into 1953. Building 11, the Kellex Laboratory building, was demolished in 1953 (Author unknown, 

1979; ORNL-DWG-77-12105). 

NIOSH has been able to locate only a very limited amount of documentation regarding the specific 

research activities and materials used at Kellex/Pierpont. The documentation located by NIOSH states 

that radiological work at Kellex/Pierpont occurred in Building 11, also known as the Kellex 

Laboratory (Author unknown, 1979; ORNL-DWG-77-12105; Kaye, 1979), but does not provide 

information regarding radiological work or storage at other locations on the Kellex/Pierpont site. The 

documents mention a fenced-in waste disposal area that was used to store two drums of uranium ore 

(Piccot, 1950); however, the documents do not provide the location of the disposal area, which may 

have been outdoors. 

The primary mission of the Kellex/Pierpont facility was to develop barrier technology for gaseous 

diffusion. Kellex/Pierpont also conducted basic research and development on fuel reprocessing and 

component testing using uranium hexafluoride; this indicated that bench quantities of materials other 

than uranium were present. The presence of fission products in the Kellex/Pierpont laboratories is 

supported by the Guide to Special Chemicals Handling (undated, but post-1955), which references 

procedures for removing fission products and provides permissible levels for radioactive substances in 

air (Author unknown, date unknown). A material inventory included in the Health Physics report for 

December 1950 (Bain, 1950) from Kellex/Pierpont to the AEC confirms the onsite presence of 

9 of 21 
 

SEC-00100 02-19-08 Kellex/Pierpont 

radioactive materials including: radium, carbon-14, chlorine-36, nickel-59, cesium-137, strontium-90, 

and thallium-204, and uranium materials such as K-65 residue. 

4.2 Radiation Exposure Potential from Operations 

The potential for external radiation dose existed at all locations where radioactive materials were 

handled or stored. Based on the site operations described in Section 4.1, sources of exposure included 

alpha, beta, photon, and neutron radiation emitted from materials containing uranium, transuranics, 

fission products, and other radionuclides used in materials research. 

The potential for internal radiation exposure existed at Building 11, where materials were handled in 

the laboratories for research purposes. These laboratories were monitored, by routine smear surveys 

and air monitoring, suggesting a potential inhalation and ingestion pathway. Section 5.3 includes 

additional detail regarding workplace monitoring documentation. There also appears to have been a 

waste storage area at the site. NIOSH is unable to rule out the transport of radioactive materials 

across the site, and possible contamination spread beyond the Kellex Laboratory building (Building 

11), given the limited documentation of facility and site operations available to NIOSH. 

4.3 Time Period Associated with Radiological Operations 

Per the DOE Office of Health, Safety and Security, the time period associated with AWE operations at 

the Kellex/Pierpont site is from 1943 through 1953 (DOE, 2007). NIOSH has been unable to locate 

information to support a more specific determination of start and end dates for radiological AWE 

work at Kellex/Pierpont. As stated in section 4.1, the Kellex Corporation was established for AEC 

work in 1943 and all information indicates that AEC work did not proceed beyond 1953. This 

evaluation therefore assumes the period of potential AWE radiological exposures at Kellex/Pierpont to 

be the period from January 1, 1943 through December 31, 1953. 

4.4 Site Locations Associated with Radiological Operations 

The Kellex/Pierpont site consisted of approximately 43 acres with approximately 20 buildings onsite. 

As described in Section 4.1, Building 11, also known as the Kellex Laboratory, is the only referenced 

location of radiological work at Kellex/Pierpont (Author unknown, 1979; ORNL-DWG-77-12105). 

Building 11 contained labs, offices, weighing facilities, change rooms, and a shielded counting room 

(ORNL-DWG-77-12105). NIOSH is unable to determine if any other locations were associated with 

the radiological research operations conducted at Kellex/Pierpont. NIOSH has not found information 

that either details or restricts the use of radionuclides in the other 19 buildings located at 

Kellex/Pierpont. While NIOSH does have access to information indicating that radionuclides other 

than uranium nuclides were used in research in the Kellex Laboratory building (see Section 4.1), 

NIOSH does not have information regarding the receipt, transport, or storage of these materials. 

NIOSH also lacks adequate data to determine if exposures to particular radionuclides were limited to 

any specific areas. Without such information, NIOSH is unable to limit the SEC class based on work 

location within the Kellex/Pierpont site. Consequently, all Kellex/Pierpont areas are included in the 

proposed SEC class. 

10 of 21 
SEC-00100 02-19-08 Kellex/Pierpont 

4.5 Job Descriptions Affected by Radiological Operations 

Very little is known about job titles, job descriptions, and/or job assignments related to radiological 

operations and research at Kellex/Pierpont. Film badge reports for the late 1940s and early 1950s (see 

Section 5.2) include the following job titles: chemists, technicians, porters, health physicists, stock 

room managers, physicists, chemical engineers, engineers, machinists, service managers, and 

receiving department. NIOSH has minimal documentation regarding which job titles and/or job 

assignments were associated with specific radiological operations or work locations at 

Kellex/Pierpont. Without additional information that links known worker job descriptions with 

specific work locations, it is not feasible to narrow listed job descriptions to only those workers with 

potential exposures to AWE radiological operations. Therefore, it is not possible to determine that 

any work group was not potentially exposed to the AEC-related exposures defined in this report, nor 

is it possible to use job descriptions to define the proposed SEC class. 

5.0 Summary of Available Monitoring Data for the Proposed Class 

The primary data used for determining internal exposures are derived from personal monitoring data, 

such as urinalyses, fecal samples, and whole-body counting results. If these are unavailable, the air 

monitoring data from breathing zone and general area monitoring are used to estimate the potential 

internal exposure. If personal monitoring and breathing zone area monitoring are unavailable, internal 

exposures can sometimes be estimated using more general area monitoring, process information, and 

information characterizing and quantifying the source term. 

This same hierarchy is used for determining the external exposures to the cancer site. Personal 

monitoring data from film badges or thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs) are the primary data used 

to determine such external exposures. If there are no personal monitoring data, exposure rate surveys, 

process knowledge, and source term modeling can sometimes be used to reconstruct the potential 

exposure. 

A more detailed discussion of the information required for dose reconstruction can be found in 

OCAS-IG-001, External Dose Reconstruction Implementation Guideline, and OCAS-IG-002, Internal 

Dose Reconstruction Implementation Guideline. These documents are available at: 

http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/ocas/ocasdose.html. 

As stated in Section 4.0 above, data capture efforts for Kellex/Pierpont have included visits to DOE 

offices and the NARA facilities. In its search for monitoring data, NIOSH has also queried various 

DOE and NRC databases to locate relevant records. Inquiries were made to the state of New Jersey as 

well. Kellex, the company that operated Kellex/Pierpont, no longer exists and could not be contacted 

to request any records. 

5.1 Internal Personnel Monitoring Data 

As of January 7, 2008, there are four Kellex/Pierpont claimants in the NIOSH claimant tracking 

system. None of the NIOSH claimant files have internal exposure monitoring records associated with 

employment at Kellex/Pierpont. There are indications that urinalysis was performed on a limited 

11 of 21 
SEC-00100 02-19-08 Kellex/Pierpont 

basis on the Kellex/Pierpont site, but NIOSH has located only 25 fluorimetric uranium urinalysis 

results, for a few individuals (Kellex, 1950-1951; Kellex, May 10, 1951-June 28, 1951). These 

urinalysis results were reported in mg/L of uranium. None of the four claimants in NIOSH’s database 

is included in these urinalysis reports. 

NIOSH has located the results of two breath samples, for one individual sampled in July 1951. The 

samples were analyzed for radon and the results were reported in pci/L. 

The existence of a bioassay monitoring program at Kellex/Pierpont, as indicated by urinalysis results 

from 1944 and 1951, suggests that Kellex believed that there was a potential for occupational intake 

of radioactive materials. NIOSH has not identified in vivo counting, fecal monitoring, or other 

bioassay monitoring results for Kellex/Pierpont, other than the urine results indicated above. 

5.2 External Personnel Monitoring Data 

NIOSH has located film badge reports for 1948 through 1953 (Kellex, 1951; Kellex, 1952; Kellex, 

February 1950-January 1951; Kellex, May 1951-January 1952; Kellex, November 1948-December 

1949; Kellex, January 1952-August 1953). These reports indicate the last name of the employee and 

any result greater than the minimum detection level of 50 mrep beta/gamma with a weekly exchange 

frequency. The reports document film badge results for approximately 20 individuals in 1948 and up 

to a maximum of 38 individuals in 1950 and 1951. The results include 75 beta results greater than 50 

mrep, and 135 gamma results greater than 50 mrep for the five years of weekly exchanges 

(approximately 7,000 results total). The highest result found by NIOSH is for March 1950, for a 

researcher who received 270 mrep beta and 400 mrep gamma. The majority of the results were less 

than 50 mrep beta and gamma. 

NIOSH has identified one of the four claimants in the NIOSH claimant tracking system as having 

external monitoring data included in the Kellex/Pierpont film badge reports. These claimant data are 

film badge results for 1950 and 1953 (Kellex, January 1952-August 1953). The other three NIOSH 

claimants have work histories at Kellex/Pierpont that end before the earliest film badge report 

available to NIOSH. 

5.3 Workplace Monitoring Data 

Health Physics reports refer to routine laboratory contamination surveys and air monitoring performed 

in the laboratories. NIOSH has found only summary results for these workplace monitoring efforts. 

These summaries provide results for “positive” smear readings, but no detailed isotopic data are 

provided. A representative example of the entries in the summary reports states “one of twenty 

smears yielded a positive result (200 B d/m off chemical bench)” (Mezzina, 1951). The summaries 

generally provide a rough location and a range of contamination levels found. The area radiation level 

survey results are given in units of mrep/hour. Frequently, the summary also includes a description of 

some determination as to the source of the radiation detected by the lab survey, such as “...caused by 

a spill of purex type activity onto diaper paper.” The survey results generally were less than 75 

mrep/hour. 

No air monitoring data prior to 1950 have been located. Of 149 air sample results from 1951 forward, 

approximately 70% indicated that the analyte was radon (Lazur, 1951; Kellex, 1950-1951; Kellex, 

12 of 21 
SEC-00100 02-19-08 Kellex/Pierpont 

October 1950-August 1951; Kellex, October –December 1950; Kellex, December 1950). While no 

information is given specifying the analyte(s) for the other 30% of the air samples, the Health Physics 

Survey reports indicate all air samples may have been for radon (Mezzina, 1951; Rezzia, 1951). 

5.4 Radiological Source Term Data 

While the Health Physics reports provide some indication of what radiological materials may have 

been at Kellex/Pierpont, these summaries are not comprehensive. NIOSH has been unable to locate 

substantial quantitative information about the radiological materials used in the research and 

development work at Kellex/Pierpont. 

The original mission of the Kellex/Pierpont facility, the development of barrier technology for 

gaseous diffusion enrichment of uranium, involved research using uranium and uranium-bearing ores. 

NIOSH has not been able to quantify the uranium source term at Kellex/Pierpont, but the barrier work 

would have involved various forms of uranium in different degrees of enrichment as the primary 

source term at Kellex/Pierpont. 

Kellex/Pierpont was also involved in research and development associated with the reprocessing of 

uranium sludge from the Hanford reactors (Miller, unknown date; Author unknown, 1978). This work 

would involve the handling of fission products and other reactor source term constituents. Wastes 

collected from the labs at Kellex/Pierpont included liquids referenced as containing millicurie 

quantities of “purex-type activity” (Mezzina, 1951; Rezzia, 1951). The PUREX (plutonium-uranium 

extraction) process experimented with at Kellex/Pierpont is undefined in the site documentation found 

by NIOSH, but the PUREX process at Hanford is known to involve transuranic, uranium, and fission 

product radionuclides. 

Several documents examined by NIOSH indicate a site concern with handling and storing uranium 

and radium bearing Congolese ores (Various authors, 1950; Piccot, 1950). The associated radon and 

thoron exposures associated with such sources would have been of significance to the estimation of 

internal doses. NIOSH considers it unlikely that the experimental nature of the work by Kellex would 

support any assumptions regarding a long-term steady-state inventory of radiological materials, such 

as would be found at a production facility. 

6.0 Feasibility of Dose Reconstruction for the Proposed Class 

42 C.F.R. § 83.14(b) states that HHS will consider a NIOSH determination that there was insufficient 

information to complete a dose reconstruction, as indicated in this present case, to be sufficient, 

without further consideration, to conclude that it is not feasible to estimate the levels of radiation 

doses of individual members of the class with sufficient accuracy. 

In the case of a petition submitted to NIOSH under 42 C.F.R. § 83.9(b), NIOSH has already 

determined that a dose reconstruction cannot be completed for an employee at the DOE or AWE 

facility. This determination by NIOSH provides the basis for the petition by the affected claimant. 

Per § 83.14(a), the NIOSH-proposed class defines those employees who, based on completed 

research, are similarly affected and for whom, as a class, dose reconstruction is similarly not feasible. 

13 of 21 
SEC-00100 02-19-08 Kellex/Pierpont 

In accordance with § 83.14(a), NIOSH may establish a second class of co-workers at the facility for 

whom NIOSH believes that dose reconstruction is similarly infeasible, but for whom additional 

research and analysis is required. If so identified, NIOSH would address this second class in a 

separate SEC evaluation rather than delay consideration of the claim currently under evaluation (see 

Section 10). This would allow NIOSH, the Board, and HHS to complete, without delay, their 

consideration of the class that includes a claimant for whom NIOSH has already determined a dose 

reconstruction cannot be completed, and whose only possible remedy under EEOICPA is the addition 

of a class of employees to the SEC. 

This section of the report summarizes research findings by which NIOSH determined that it lacked 

sufficient information to complete the relevant dose reconstruction and on which basis it has defined 

the class of employees for which dose reconstruction is not feasible. NIOSH’s determination relies on 

the same statutory and regulatory criteria that govern consideration of all SEC petitions. 

6.1 Feasibility of Estimating Internal Exposures 

As indicated in Section 5, NIOSH has access to limited internal monitoring data. The twenty-five 

uranium urinalysis results and two radon breath sample results located do not provide enough 

information (e.g., processes involved and location), nor do they span enough of the time period to 

ensure the exposure model would be bounding. In addition, no in vivo counting, fecal monitoring, or 

other bioassay monitoring results have been located. The available data are insufficient to support 

conclusions regarding the potential magnitude of any internal dose. Without more internal monitoring 

data and better information to characterize the monitoring data quality, the bioassay data available are 

inadequate to estimate, with sufficient accuracy, the potential internal exposure to the many potential 

sources of internal exposures associated with the research conducted by Kellex/Pierpont. 

Consequently, NIOSH is unable to estimate internal exposures based on available bioassay data. 

As indicated in Section 5, NIOSH has access to limited workplace monitoring and source term 

information. NIOSH has laboratory survey summary information with gross alpha beta and gamma 

readings but no isotopic analyses, only references to fission products, uranium, and purex-type wastes. 

Air sampling reports for 1950 and 1951 are available, but samples were analyzed only for radon. The 

available data indicate a potential for internal exposure to uranium, ores, byproducts, fission products 

and transuranic radionuclides. NIOSH lacks source term and process information relevant to the 

research conducted at the Kellex/Pierpont laboratories. As indicated in section 4.2, NIOSH is unable 

to define the probable transport procedures for radioactive materials across the site or the possible 

contamination spread beyond the Kellex Laboratory building (Building 11); therefore NIOSH is 

unable to define the SEC class based on work location within the Kellex/Pierpont site. NIOSH lacks 

sufficient source term, personal air monitoring, and programmatic information for Kellex/Pierpont to 

develop an exposure matrix using the limited workplace air monitoring and contamination survey data 

that have been located. Thus, NIOSH finds that it is not feasible, in the absence of bioassay data, to 

adequately estimate internal exposures using workplace monitoring data. 

Based on the lack of sufficient relevant bioassay, workplace, and source term data, NIOSH is unable 

to reconstruct with sufficient accuracy the potential total internal doses that may have been received 

from potential exposures to radionuclides at the Kellex/Pierpont site during the covered operational 

period from January 1, 1943 through December 31, 1953. 

14 of 21 
 

SEC-00100 02-19-08 Kellex/Pierpont 

6.2 Feasibility of Estimating External Exposures 

This evaluation responds to a petition based on NIOSH determining that internal radiation exposures 

could not be reconstructed for a dose reconstruction referred to NIOSH by the Department of Labor 

(DOL). As noted above, HHS will consider this determination to be sufficient without further 

consideration to determine that it is not feasible to estimate the levels of radiation doses of individual 

members of the class with sufficient accuracy. Consequently, it is not necessary for NIOSH to 

evaluate the feasibility of reconstructing external radiation exposures in this case. 

External monitoring data available to NIOSH suggest that workers were potentially exposed to beta 

and photon radiation during the course of employment at Kellex/Pierpont from January 1, 1943 

through December 31, 1953. While NIOSH is unaware of any documentation regarding the methods 

used for monitoring, or the quality control procedures used to audit the results, it may be possible to 

estimate the external dose for the periods of operation for which film badge reports are available. 

Given the lack of more specific documentation on the processes and source term data, it is not feasible 

to reconstruct with sufficient accuracy the external doses that may have been received from potential 

exposure to radionuclides during periods for which monitoring results are not available at 

Kellex/Pierpont. 

NIOSH considers the adequate reconstruction of medical dose for Kellex/Pierpont feasible by using 

claimant-favorable assumptions as well as the applicable protocols in the complex-wide Technical 

Information Bulletin Dose Reconstruction from Occupationally Related Diagnostic X-Ray Procedures 

(ORAUT-OTIB-0006). 

7.0 Summary of Feasibility Findings for Petition SEC-00100 

This report evaluated the feasibility for estimating the dose, with sufficient accuracy, for all AWE 

employees at the Kellex/Pierpont site from January 1, 1943 through December 31, 1953. NIOSH 

determined that it lacks the necessary bioassay data, personal air monitoring data, source term data, 

and process information to reconstruct the total internal exposures at the facility during this time 

period. Consequently, NIOSH finds that it is not feasible to estimate with sufficient accuracy the 

radiation doses resulting from internal radionuclide exposures received by members of this class of 

employees. 

NIOSH has documented herein that it cannot complete the dose reconstruction related to this petition. 

The basis of this finding is specified in this report, which demonstrates that NIOSH does not have 

access to sufficient information to estimate either the maximum radiation dose incurred by any 

member of the class or to estimate such radiation doses more precisely than a maximum dose 

estimate. 

Members of this class at Kellex/Pierpont may have received alpha, beta, photon, or neutron exposures 

from multiple radionuclides used as part of the research conducted at the Kellex/Pierpont facility. 

NIOSH lacks sufficient information, which includes biological monitoring data, sufficient air 

monitoring information, process information, and radiological source term information to allow 

NIOSH to estimate the potential internal radiological exposure(s) to which the proposed class may 

15 of 21 
SEC-00100 02-19-08 Kellex/Pierpont 

have been exposed. NIOSH may be able to estimate external dose for the periods of operation for 

which film badge monitoring data are available. 

Occupational medical exposures may be reasonably estimated by using claimant-favorable 

assumptions as well as the applicable protocols in the complex-wide Technical Information Bulletin 

Dose Reconstruction from Occupationally Related Diagnostic X-Ray Procedures (ORAUT-OTIB0006). 

8.0 Evaluation of Health Endangerment for Petition SEC-00100 

The health endangerment determination for the class of employees covered by this evaluation report is 

governed by EEOICPA and 42 C.F.R. § 83.14(c) and § 83.13(c)(3). Pursuant to these requirements, if 

it is not feasible to estimate with sufficient accuracy radiation doses for members of the class, NIOSH 

must determine that there is a reasonable likelihood that such radiation doses may have endangered 

the health of members of the class. The regulations require NIOSH to assume that any duration of 

unprotected exposure may have endangered the health of members of a class when it has been 

established that the class may have been exposed to radiation during a discrete incident likely to have 

involved levels of exposure similarly high to those occurring during nuclear criticality incidents. If 

the occurrence of such an exceptionally high-level exposure has not been established, then NIOSH is 

required to specify that health was endangered for those workers who were employed for a number of 

work days aggregating at least 250 work days within the parameters established for the class or in 

combination with work days within the parameters established for one or more other classes of 

employees in the SEC. 

NIOSH has not obtained evidence from any source that indicates that members of the class were 

exposed to radiation during a discrete incident likely to have involved levels of exposure similarly 

high to those occurring during nuclear criticality incidents. However, the evidence reviewed in this 

evaluation indicates that some workers in the class may have accumulated chronic radiation exposures 

through intakes of radionuclides and from direct exposure to radioactive materials. Consequently, 

NIOSH is specifying that health was endangered for those workers covered by this evaluation who 

were employed for a number of work days aggregating at least 250 work days within the parameters 

established for this class or in combination with work days within the parameters established for one 

or more other classes of employees in the SEC. 

9.0 NIOSH-Proposed Class for Petition SEC-00100 

The evaluation defines a single class of employees for which NIOSH cannot estimate radiation doses 

with sufficient accuracy. This class includes all AWE employees who worked at the Kellex/Pierpont 

facility in Jersey City, New Jersey from January 1, 1943 through December 31, 1953, for a number of 

work days aggregating at least 250 work days, occurring either solely under this employment or in 

combination with work days within the parameters established for one or more other classes of 

employees in the SEC. 

16 of 21 
 

SEC-00100 02-19-08 Kellex/Pierpont 

10.0 Evaluation of Second Similar Class 

In accordance with § 83.14(a), NIOSH may establish a second class of co-workers at the facility, 

similar to the class defined in Section 9.0, for whom NIOSH believes that dose reconstruction may not 

be feasible, and for whom additional research and analyses is required. If a second class is identified, 

it would require additional research and analyses. Such a class would be addressed in a separate SEC 

evaluation rather than delay consideration of the current claim. At this time, NIOSH has not identified 

a second similar class of employees at Kellex/Pierpont for whom dose reconstruction may not be 

feasible. 

17 of 21 
SEC-00100 02-19-08 Kellex/Pierpont 

This page intentionally left blank 

18 of 21
 
SEC-00100 02-19-08 Kellex/Pierpont 

11 .0 Re fe re nces 

42 C.F.R. pt. 81, Guidelines for Determining the Probability of Causation Under the Energy 

Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act of 2000; Final Rule, Federal 

Register/Vol. 67, No. 85/Thursday, p. 22,296; May 2, 2002; SRDB Ref ID: 19391 

42 C.F.R. pt. 82, Methods for Radiation Dose Reconstruction Under the Energy Employees 

Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act of 2000; Final Rule; May 2, 2002; SRDB Ref ID: 

19392 

42 C.F.R. pt. 83, Procedures for Designating Classes of Employees as Members of the Special 

Exposure Cohort Under the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act of 

2000; Final Rule; May 28, 2004; SRDB Ref ID: 22001 

42 U.S.C. §§ 7384-7385 [EEOICPA], Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation 

Program Act of 2000; as amended; OCAS website 

ORAUT-0TIB-0006, Dose Reconstruction from Occupationally Related Diagnostic X-Ray 

Procedures, Rev. 3, PC-1; Oak Ridge Associated Universities (ORAU); Oak Ridge, Tennessee; 

December 21, 2005; SRDB Ref ID: Not currently assigned 

ORNL-DWG-77-12105, Miscellaneous Information Regarding Kellex Corporation, only select pages 

from an unidentified document; Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL); unknown date; SRDB Ref 

ID: 9686, pages 62-64 

Author unknown, date unknown, Guide to Special Chemicals Handling; Author Unknown; Post-1955; 

SRDB 32275 

Author unknown, 1978, Characterization of Past Activities of 26 Potential Remedial Action Sites; 

author unknown; June 14, 1978; SRDB Ref ID: 9686, pages 37-40 

Author unknown, 1979, Post Decontamination Radiological Survey of the Former Kellex Laboratory 

Site, Jersey City, New Jersey; author unknown; October 15, 1979; SRDB Ref ID: 9686, pages 54-57 

Bain, 1950, Laboratory Survey Ending December 21, 1950; W. A. Bain; December 26, 1950; SRDB 

Ref ID: 11065, pages 2-5 

DOE, 2007, DOE Office of Health, Safety and Security EEOICPA Web Page; 

http://www.hss.energy.gov/healthsafety/fwsp/advocacy/faclist/findfacility.cfm; last accessed on 

December 3, 2007 

Kaye, 1979, Formerly Utilized Sites—Remedial Action Program—Post Decontamination 

Radiological Survey of a Portion of the Former Kellex Laboratory Site, Jersey City, New Jersey; 

Stephen Kaye; August 21, 1979; SRDB Ref ID: 9702 

Kellex, date unknown, Radiological Characterization of the Kellex Site; Kellex Corp.; date unknown; 

SRDB Ref ID: 9686, page 5-13 

19 of 21 
SEC-00100 02-19-08 Kellex/Pierpont 

Kellex, November 1948-December 1949, Film Badge Reports; Kellex Corp.; November 1948-

December 1949; SRDB Ref ID: 9752 

Kellex, 1950-1951, Air Sample Reports; Kellex Corp.; 1950-1951; SRDB Ref ID: 9724 

Kellex, February 1950-January 1951; Film Badge Report; Kellex Corp.; February 1950-January 1951: 

SRDB Ref ID: 9749 

Kellex, October-December 1950, Air Sample Reports; Kellex Corp.; October 1950-December 1950; 

SRDB Ref ID: 9738 

Kellex, October 1950-August 1951; Air Sample Reports; Kellex Corp.; October 1950-August 1951: 

SRDB Ref ID: 9737 

Kellex, December 1950, Air Sample Report; Kellex Corp.; December 6, 1950; SRDB Ref ID: 9740 

Kellex, 1951, 1951 Film Badge Results; Kellex Corp.; 1951; SRDB Ref ID: 9745 

Kellex, May 1951-January 1952, Film Badge Reports; Kellex Corp.; May 1951-January 1952; SRDB 

Ref ID: 9750 

Kellex, May 10, 1951-June 28, 1951, Urine Sample Results; Kellex Corp.; May 10, 1951 through June 

28, 1951; SRDB Ref ID: 9742 

Kellex, 1952, 1952 Film Badge Reports; Kellex Corp.; 1952; SRDB Ref ID: 9748 

Kellex, January 1952-August 1953, Film Badge Reports; Kellex Corp.; January 1952-August 1953; 

SRDB Ref ID: 9679 

Lazur, 1951, 1951 Air Sample Report, Kellex Corporation; E. Lazur; April 1951; SRDB Ref ID: 9723 

Mezzina, 1951, Laboratory Survey Report, period ending September 22, 1951; A. Mezzina; 

September 26, 1951; SRDB Ref ID: 15362 

Miller, unknown date, MED 26 Potential Remedial Action Sites, draft spreadsheet; Steven R. Miller; 

unknown date; SRDB Ref ID: 9686, pages 20-26 

ORNL, date unknown, Results of the Post Remedial Action Survey of Areas 4 through 9 at the Former 

Kellex Site in Jersey City, New Jersey, only select pages; Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL); 

date unknown; SRDB Ref ID: 9686, pages 15-18 

Piccot, 1949, Contamination and Radiation Status of Kellex Laboratories at Jersey City; A. R. Piccot; 

September 29, 1949; SRDB Ref ID: 11080 

Piccot, 1950, Ore and K-65 Handling at Jersey City Kellex, memo to W. B. Harris; A. R. Piccot; April 

21, 1950; SRDB Ref ID: 11067 

20 of 21 
SEC-00100 02-19-08 Kellex/Pierpont 

Rezzia, 1951, Laboratory Survey Report, period ending November 16, 1951; A. Rezzia; November 

16, 1951; SRDB Ref ID: 15364 

Various authors, 1950, Various Health Physics Reports, April through December 1950; various 

authors; April 1950 through December 1950; SRDB Ref ID: 11065 

21 of 21